Re: [midcom] WG scope/deliverables

[smd at ebone.net (Sean Doran)]

Bill Manning writes:

|  and tosses it w/o any abilitiy to notify the originating 
|  party. 

Why is it necessary that there be an inability to notify the
originating party?   dkerr already proved it's cheep cheep cheep
to maintain some types of state even with lots of flows per second,
and the whole point is to consider ways in which midcom boxes can
do speed-smarts trade-offs to help avoid such "inabilities" in
the first place.  No?

"Hm, now let's see, a router on the 'outside' just sent back this
odd ICMP message.  Whatever should I do with it?" may not be so
difficult to answer in a manner different than "ignore it, and hope
the sender up eventually stops whatever it's doing to trigger the
error message".

Translating & Mapping Gateways may be "tricky" enough to scare some
people, but this is kindergarten compared to this very issue in MPLS...

	Sean.